The Kidds' smaller magazines is primarily a weight issue. The Kidd design was pressed fairly hard up against the Spruance hull's limiting displacement
when the ships were built. That isn't all that surprising, considering that they were essentially baseline Spruances built with the DDG conversion package
that had been planned as a possible mid-life update. That "conversion" ate up pretty much the whole available growth margin -- there wasn't
enough weight left to fit a larger VLS forward, even if there was room. And because it was a "minimum change" design from the Spruance, the Kidd
also had that oversized loading room that used up some of the needed volume.
The Tico's, conversely, have a remarkable number of modifications to the Spruance hull. Certain bulkheads were strengthened, cross-flooding ducts were added, fuel ballast was increased, the towed array sonar compartment was made watertight, and growth margins were slashed. The limiting displacement rose sharply as a result -- for the Spruances it was something like 8,800 tons plus 580 tons of growth margin; for the Ticos it was 10,200 tons plus 160 tons of margin.
I think your reference is probably a bit confused on the VLS question. The shafts are (obviously) not an issue for the VLS. Even before VLS was adopted, the Spruance design planned for a Mk 26 launcher in place of Sea Sparrow, so there was certainly the room for a VLS there as well (there are three full decks from the weather deck to the shaft alleys, which is plenty). Where the shafts come into play is with the the aft gun spaces. Those sit right above the shafts, which is why the Spruances could not have taken a Mk 71 gun in the aft position (as has already been mentioned here).
The Tico's, conversely, have a remarkable number of modifications to the Spruance hull. Certain bulkheads were strengthened, cross-flooding ducts were added, fuel ballast was increased, the towed array sonar compartment was made watertight, and growth margins were slashed. The limiting displacement rose sharply as a result -- for the Spruances it was something like 8,800 tons plus 580 tons of growth margin; for the Ticos it was 10,200 tons plus 160 tons of margin.
I think your reference is probably a bit confused on the VLS question. The shafts are (obviously) not an issue for the VLS. Even before VLS was adopted, the Spruance design planned for a Mk 26 launcher in place of Sea Sparrow, so there was certainly the room for a VLS there as well (there are three full decks from the weather deck to the shaft alleys, which is plenty). Where the shafts come into play is with the the aft gun spaces. Those sit right above the shafts, which is why the Spruances could not have taken a Mk 71 gun in the aft position (as has already been mentioned here).
)
